The compliance of doctors with viral hepatitis B screening and antiviral prophylaxis in cancer patients receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy using a hospital-based screening reminder system

Screening for viral hepatitis B infection in cancer patients before receiving chemotherapy - A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the hepatitis B virus (HBV) screening rate in cancer patients before systemic chemotherapy, aiming to identify those needing antiviral prophylaxis for HBV reactivation.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar for relevant studies. The pooled screening rate was estimated using a random effects model. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on malignancy types, chemotherapy regimens, study period, and HBV endemic regions.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 29 studies from various endemic regions (19 low-endemic, three lower intermediate-endemic, and seven higher intermediate-endemic). These studies encompassed hematologic malignancies (n = 10), solid-organ tumors (n = 4), and combinations (n = 15). Seven studies used rituximab-containing regimens, four did not, and the remaining 11 did not specify chemotherapy regimens. The pooled screening rate was 57% (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 46%-68%, I2 = 100%). Over time, screening rates improved from 37% (95%CI: 23%-53%) in 2006-2010 to 68% (54%-80%) in 2011-2015 and 69% (48%-84%) in 2016-2020. Screening rates were highest at 89% (74%-96%) in high endemic countries, followed by 60% (45-73%) in lower-intermediate and 49% (34-64%) in low-endemic countries. Patients with hematological malignancies had a higher screening rate than those with solid organ tumors, 65% (55%-74%) versus 37% (21%-57%), respectively. A screening rate was higher in patients receiving rituximab-containing chemotherapy than non-rituximab regimens, 68% (55%-79%) versus 45% (27%-65%).

CONCLUSION

Despite existing guidelines, pre-chemotherapy HBV screening rate remains unsatisfactory, with substantial heterogeneous rates globally. These findings underscore the need for effective strategies to align practices with clinical guidelines.

Patients treated with rituximab are poorly screened for hepatitis B infection: Data from a low-incidence country

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients with chronic or resolved hepatitis B are at risk of hepatitis B reactivation (HBVr) when treated with high-risk immunosuppressive therapy such as rituximab. Therefore, international guidelines recommend HBV screening prior to rituximab treatment and subsequent antiviral prophylaxis among patients with a (resolved) infection. In this study, we evaluated the adherence to those recommendations.

METHODS

This is a retrospective multicentre study including patients treated with rituximab between 2000-2021. Performance of correct screening was assessed, defined as the measurement of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and hepatitis B core antibodies (anti-HBc). Next, initiation of antiviral prophylaxis and HBVr rate among patients with a chronic or resolved HBV infection was studied.

RESULTS

We enrolled 3,176 patients of whom 1,448 (46%) were screened correctly. Screening rates differed significantly between academic and non-academic hospitals; respectively 65% vs 32% (p<0.001). In addition, screening rates differed across specialties and improved throughout the years; from 32% before 2012 to 75% after 2020 among academic prescribers, versus 1% to 60% among non-academic prescribers (both p<0.001). Antiviral prophylaxis was initiated in 58% vs 36% of the patients with a chronic or resolved HBV infection. Seven patients experienced HBVr, including one fatal liver decompensation.

CONCLUSIONS

Many patients treated with rituximab were not correctly screened for HBV infection and antiviral prophylaxis was often not initiated. Although screening rates improved over time, rates remain suboptimal. With the increasing number of indications for rituximab and other immunosuppressive agents these findings could raise awareness among all medical specialties prescribing these agents.

Prevention of Hepatitis B Reactivation in Patients Receiving Immunosuppressive Therapy: a Case Series and Appraisal of Society Guidelines

Hepatitis B (HBV) reactivation (HBVr) is a potentially fatal complication in patients with past HBV exposure receiving immunosuppressive therapy. HBVr can occur in patients with chronic HBV infection as well as in patients with resolved HBV infection. In this article, we present the cases of four patients with resolved hepatitis B who presented with HBVr during or after immunosuppressive treatment, of whom two died as a consequence of HBVr. We then reflect on and summarize the recommendations of four major societies for the screening and management of previously HBV-exposed patients planned to receive immunosuppressive treatment. Current guidelines recommend screening for HBV in all patients planned to receive immunosuppressive therapy. Risk of HBVr is assessed based on the serological status of the patient and the planned immunosuppressive drug regimen. For patients considered to be at low risk of HBVr, management consists of serological monitoring for HBVr and immediate preemptive antiviral therapy in the case of HBVr. For patients considered to be at intermediate or high risk for HBVr, antiviral prophylaxis should be initiated concordantly with the immunosuppressive therapy and continued for up to 18 months after cessation of the immunosuppressive regimen. Areas of uncertainty include the risk of novel and emerging immunosuppressive and immune modulatory drugs and the exact duration of antiviral prophylaxis. Greater awareness is needed among clinicians regarding the risk of HBVr in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy, especially in low-endemicity settings. Implementation of screening and management programs and decision support tools based on the presented guidelines may improve the management of these patients.

Small-molecule SUMO inhibition for biomarker-informed B-cell lymphoma therapy

Aberrant activity of the SUMOylation pathway has been associated with MYC overexpression and poor prognosis in aggressive B-cell lymphoma (BCL) and other malignancies. Recently developed small-molecule inhibitors of SUMOylation (SUMOi) target the heterodimeric E1 SUMO activation complex (SAE1/UBA2). Here, we report that activated MYC signaling is an actionable molecular vulnerability in vitro and in a preclinical murine in vivo model of MYC-driven BCL. While SUMOi conferred direct effects on MYC-driven lymphoma cells, SUMO inhibition also resulted in substantial remodeling of various subsets of the innate and specific immunity in vivo. Specifically, SUMOi increased the number of memory B cells as well as cytotoxic and memory T cells, subsets that are attributed a key role within a coordinated anti-tumor immune response. In summary, our data constitute pharmacologic SUMOi as a powerful therapy in a subset of BCL causing massive remodeling of the normal B-cell and T-cell compartment.

Hepatitis B Virus Screening Before Cancer Chemotherapy in Taiwan: A Nationwide Population-Based Study

Background: Reactivation of the hepatitis B virus (HBV) during cancer chemotherapy is a severe and sometimes fatal complication. In 2009, the National Health Insurance (NHI) in Taiwan recommended and reimbursed screening for HBV infection and prophylactic antiviral therapy before cancer chemotherapy. In this study, we determined the HBV screening rate in patients with cancer undergoing chemotherapy in Taiwan.

Methods: We retrospectively collected data from the National Health Insurance Research Database on patients who received systemic chemotherapy for solid or hematologic cancers from January 2000 through December 2012. We defined HBV screening based on testing for serum HBsAg within 2 years of the first chemotherapy commencement. We calculated overall and annual HBV screening rates in all patients and subgroups of age, gender, cancer type, hospital level, physician's department, and implementation of NHI reimbursement for HBV screening before cancer chemotherapy.

Results: We enrolled 379,639 patients. The overall HBV screening rate was 45.9%. The screening rates were higher in males, those with hematological cancer, those at non-medical centers and medical departments. The HBV screening rates before (2000–2008) and after the implementation of NHI reimbursement (2009–2012) were 38.1 and 57.5%, respectively (p < 0.0001). The most common practice pattern of HBV screening was only HBsAg (64.6%) followed by HBsAg/HBsAb (22.1%), and HBsAg/HBcAb/HBsAb (0.7%) (p < 0.0001). The annual HBV screening rate increased from 31.5 to 66.3% (p < 0.0001). The screening rates of solid and hematological cancers significantly increased by year; however, the trend was greater in solid cancer than in hematological cancer (35.9 and 26.2%, p < 0.0001).

Conclusions: The HBV screening rate before cancer chemotherapy was fair but increased over time. These figures improved after implementing a government-based strategy; however, a mandatory hospital-based strategy might improve awareness of HBV screening and starting prophylactic antiviral therapy before cancer chemotherapy.

Latent infection screening and prevalence in cancer patients born outside of Australia: a universal versus risk-based approach?

PURPOSE

Contention surrounds how best to screen patients for latent and undiagnosed infection prior to cancer treatment. Early treatment and prophylaxis against reactivation may improve infection-associated morbidity. This study sought to examine rates of screening and prevalence of latent infection in overseas-born patients receiving cancer therapies.

METHODS

A single-centre retrospective audit of 952 overseas-born patients receiving chemotherapy, targeted agents and immunotherapy between January 1 and December 31 2019 was undertaken at Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre. Pre-treatment screening for hepatitis B (HBV), hepatitis C (HCV), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), latent tuberculosis (LTBI), toxoplasmosis and strongyloidiasis was audited.

RESULTS

Approximately half of our overseas-born patients were screened for HBV (58.9%) and HCV (50.7%). Fewer patients were screened for HIV (30.5%), LTBI (18.3%), strongyloidiasis (8.6%) or toxoplasmosis (8.1%). Although 59.7% of our patients were born in countries with high epidemiological risk for latent infection, according to World Health Organization data, 35% were not screened for any infection prior to commencement of therapy.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of latent infections amongst overseas-born patients with cancer, and complexities associated with risk-based screening, likely supports universal latent infection screening amongst this higher-risk cohort.

Hepatitis B Virus Screening and Management for Patients With Cancer Prior to Therapy: ASCO Provisional Clinical Opinion Update

PURPOSE

This Provisional Clinical Opinion update presents a clinically pragmatic approach to hepatitis B virus (HBV) screening and management.

PROVISIONAL CLINICAL OPINION

All patients anticipating systemic anticancer therapy should be tested for HBV by 3 tests-hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc) total immunoglobulin (Ig) or IgG, and antibody to hepatitis B surface antigen-but anticancer therapy should not be delayed. Findings of chronic HBV (HBsAg-positive) or past HBV (HBsAg-negative and anti-HBc-positive) infection require HBV reactivation risk assessment.Patients with chronic HBV receiving any systemic anticancer therapy should receive antiviral prophylactic therapy through and for minimum 12 months following anticancer therapy. Hormonal therapy alone should not pose a substantial risk of HBV reactivation in patients with chronic HBV receiving hormonal therapy alone; these patients may follow noncancer HBV monitoring and treatment guidance. Coordination of care with a clinician experienced in HBV management is recommended for patients with chronic HBV to determine HBV monitoring and long-term antiviral therapy after completion of anticancer therapy.Patients with past HBV infection undergoing anticancer therapies associated with a high risk of HBV reactivation, such as anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies or stem-cell transplantation, should receive antiviral prophylaxis during and for minimum 12 months after anticancer therapy completion, with individualized management thereafter. Careful monitoring may be an alternative if patients and providers can adhere to frequent, consistent follow-up so antiviral therapy may begin at the earliest sign of reactivation. Patients with past HBV undergoing other systemic anticancer therapies not clearly associated with a high risk of HBV reactivation should be monitored with HBsAg and alanine aminotransferase during cancer treatment; antiviral therapy should commence if HBV reactivation occurs.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

High hepatitis B virus screening rate among patients receiving systemic anticancer treatment in Japan

BACKGROUND

Patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection have a risk of reactivation after chemotherapy. All patients undergoing chemotherapy should be screened for HBV infection. No large-scale studies have been conducted to examine HBV screening practice in Japan.

METHODS

We analyzed health insurance claims equivalent data linked with a nationwide hospital-based cancer registry. Patients diagnosed with cancer in 2014, who were aged 20 years and older and those who underwent systemic anticancer treatment in 2014-15 were included. We assessed the HBV screening rates by the HBsAg or anti-HBc tests, HBV-DNA tests, and entecavir prescriptions. Multiple logistic regression models were used to identify factors related to the receipt of screening.

RESULTS

Of 177,597 patients (mean [SD] age, 65.6 [12.2] years), 82.6% and 12.9% patients had a solid tumor and hematologic malignancy, respectively. Among them, 88.1%, 6.3%, and 5.5% received cytotoxic chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and anti-CD20 antibodies, respectively. Overall, 70.6% of patients were screened. The positive predictor of HBV screening was receiving anti-CD20 antibodies [odds ratio (OR); 2.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.06-2.41, p < 0.001] and negative predictors were age ≥ 85 (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.71-0.81), age 75-84 (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.75-0.79) and targeted therapy (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.67-0.72). Among the screened patients, 13.2% were tested for HBV-DNA, and 1.49% were prescribed entecavir.

CONCLUSIONS

The HBV screening rate in Japan is higher than in other countries. Further improvement of the HBV screening rate is needed to prevent reactivation and avoidable deaths of patients with HBV infection.

Preventing Hepatitis B Reactivation During Anti-CD20 Antibody Treatment in the Veterans Health Administration

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation may occur with high risk immunosuppression, such as anti-cluster of differentiation (CD)20 antibodies (Abs). Appropriate HBV prophylaxis during anti-CD20 Ab therapy averts hepatitis, chemotherapy disruption, and death. Serologic evidence of prior HBV exposure is present in one in nine veterans in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). In 2014, most (61%-73%) patients in the VHA who were receiving anti-CD20 Ab treatment underwent HBV testing, yet <20% of eligible patients received HBV antiviral prophylaxis. We aimed to prevent HBV reactivation by increasing HBV testing and antiviral treatment rates among anti-CD20 Ab recipients through prospective interventions. A multidisciplinary team of clinicians, pharmacists, and public health professionals developed comprehensive prevention systems, including national seminars/newsletters/websites; pharmacy criteria for HBV screening/treatment prior to anti-CD20 Ab use; changes to national formulary restrictions to expand HBV prophylaxis prescribing authority; Medication Use Evaluation Tracker to identify omissions; national e-mail alert to all VHA oncology providers detailing specific testing and HBV antiviral treatment needs; and a voluntary electronic medical record "order check" used at interested facilities (n = 11) to automatically assess pretreatment HBV testing and antiviral treatment and only generate a reminder to address deficiencies. Analysis of monthly data from June 2016 through September 2017 among anti-CD20 Ab recipients revealed pre-anti-CD20 Ab treatment HBV testing increased to 91%-96% and appropriate HBV antiviral prophylaxis to 76%-85% nationally following implementation of the intervention. Medical centers using the voluntary electronic medical record order check increased HBV testing rates to 93%-98% and HBV antiviral prophylaxis rates to 99%. Conclusion: Multimodal intervention systems to prevent HBV reactivation among VHA patients receiving anti-CD20 Ab therapies increased national rates of HBV testing to >90% and antiviral prophylaxis to >80%.

Using health-system-wide data to understand hepatitis B virus prophylaxis and reactivation outcomes in patients receiving rituximab

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in the setting of rituximab use is a potentially fatal but preventable safety event. The rate of HBV screening and proportion of patients at risk who receive antiviral prophylaxis in patients initiating rituximab is unknown.We analyzed electronic health record (EHR) data from 2 health systems, a university center and a safety net health system, including diagnosis grouper codes, problem lists, medications, laboratory results, procedures codes, clinical encounter notes, and scanned documents. We identified all patients who received rituximab between 6/1/2012 and 1/1/2016. We calculated the proportion of rituximab users with inadequate screening for HBV according to the Centers for Disease Control guidelines for detecting latent HBV infection before their first rituximab infusion during the study period. We also assessed the proportion of patients with positive hepatitis B screening tests who were prescribed antiviral prophylaxis. Finally, we characterized safety failures and adverse events.We included 926 patients from the university and 132 patients from the safety net health system. Sixty-one percent of patients from the university had adequate screening for HBV compared with 90% from the safety net. Among patients at risk for reactivation based on results of HBV testing, 66% and 92% received antiviral prophylaxis at the university and safety net, respectively.We found wide variations in hepatitis B screening practices among patients receiving rituximab, resulting in unnecessary risks to patients. Interventions should be developed to improve patient safety procedures in this high-risk patient population.

Improvements in hepatitis B virus screening before rituximab therapy: A community-based, safety-net hospital experience

BACKGROUND

Individuals with chronic hepatitis B virus infection (HBV) or previously resolved HBV are at increased risk of HBV exacerbation or reactivation when they receive treatment with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies (against B-lymphocyte antigen cluster of differentiation 20 [CD20], an activated-glycosylated phosphoprotein) like rituximab (RTX). The objective of the current study was to evaluate the rates of appropriate HBV screening before patients started receiving RTX, at the initiation of HBV treatment, and during HBV flares among an underserved safety-net population.

METHODS

In total, 244 consecutive adults who received treatment with RTX from 2006 to 2015 at an urban safety-net hospital were evaluated to determine appropriate HBV screening (HBV surface antigen [HBsAg] and HBV total core antibody [HBcAb]) before starting RTX. The initiation of prophylactic antiviral therapy and the development of HBV flares after starting RTX were evaluated. Predictors of appropriate HBV screening were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Most patients were women (52.7%; n = 128) and of Hispanic ethnicity (30.7%; n = 74). Before starting RTX, 60.5% (n = 147) of patients received appropriate HBV screening. The HBV screening rates before RTX improved from 14.7% (2006-2009) to 74.7% (2010-2012), and to 87.1% (2013-2015; P < .01. Two of 7 (28.6%) HBsAg-positive patients who did not receive antiviral therapy experienced HBV flares and 1 died, and 2 of 27 patients (7.4%) HBcAb-positive/HBsAg-negative patients who did not receive antiviral therapy experienced HBV reactivation. No patient-specific or disease-specific predictors of receiving HBV screening before RTX therapy were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Among adults receiving RTX therapy in a single community-based hospital system, HBV screening rates were suboptimal, and 28.6% of HBsAg-positive patients and 7.4% of HBsAg-negative/HBcAb-positive patients who did not receive antiviral treatment experienced HBV reactivation or flare. Cancer 2017;123:650-656. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Improving testing for hepatitis B before treatment with rituximab

AIMS/OBJECTIVES/BACKGROUND

Individuals with current or previous infection with the hepatitis B virus (HBV) can experience viral reactivation when treated with immunosuppression. Rituximab, an anti-CD20 antibody used to treat many diseases, has potent immunosuppressant effects with a high risk of causing HBV reactivation. Reactivation can range from elevated liver enzymes to acute severe hepatitis with liver failure and a significant mortality risk. HBV screening and appropriate use of prophylactic antiviral therapy can prevent reactivation. This work describes the introduction of a local policy for HBV testing in patients before rituximab treatment and assesses its impact.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A baseline review (before policy introduction) of 90 patients showed that only 21 (23%) had hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and 17 (19%) had hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBcAb) tested before receiving rituximab. Following introduction of the policy (on the basis of international guidelines), improved laboratory reporting protocols and targeted education sessions, two further reviews of HBV testing rates among patients being initiated onto rituximab were performed. There was a marked increase in pre-rituximab testing for HBsAg from 23 to 79% and for anti-HBcAb from 19 to 78%. Throughout the study period, a total of one (0.8%) HBsAg-positive and six (4.7%) anti-HBcAb-positive patients were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

This work clearly indicates that simple strategies can markedly improve appropriate HBV screening. In our cohort, 6% (of whom only 43% had recognized HBV risk factors) required antiviral prophylaxis, which emphasizes the importance of universal screening before rituximab. Reinforcement of the guidelines and ongoing education is needed to further increase testing rates.

Gastroenterologists Have Suboptimal Hepatitis B Virus Screening Rates in Patients Receiving Immunosuppressive Therapy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Hepatitis B reactivation in patients undergoing immunosuppressive therapy can lead to liver failure and death. Prior studies have shown suboptimal hepatitis B screening rates, but few have compared screening rates across specialties or factors associated with screening.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed using a hospital-based chemotherapy database and outpatient pharmacy records from January 1999 to December 2013. HBV screening rates prior to initiation of immunosuppression were determined. Multivariate analysis was used to determine predictors of HBV screening.

RESULTS

Of the 4008 study patients, 47 % were screened prior to receiving immunosuppressive therapy; only 48 % on rituximab and 45 % of those on anti-TNF therapy were screened. Transplant specialists screened most frequently (85 %) while gastroenterologists screened the least (34 %). Factors significantly associated with HBV screening were younger age, Asian race, use of anti-rejection therapy, and treatment by a transplant specialist (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

HBV screening prior to immunosuppressive therapy is suboptimal, especially among gastroenterologists. Efforts to improve screening rates in at risk populations are needed.

Hepatitis B Reactivation with Novel Agents in Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma and Prevention Strategies

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection remains an endemic disease in most parts of the world despite available prophylactic vaccines. Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma is the most common hematological malignancy, and certain patients undergoing therapy are at increased risk of HBV reactivation. Rituximab, a monoclonal antibody, is well studied in HBV reactivation, but newer agents have been implicated as well. Here, we review novel agents suspected in HBV reactivation and effective strategies to prevent HBV reactivation. Fifteen years of literature were reviewed in order to better understand the reactivation rates of hepatitis B in patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Anti-CD20 antibodies continue to be the main medications that can lead to HBV reactivation, and HBV reactivation rates have decreased with increased awareness. HBV reactivation is uncommon when using other novel agents. Entecavir and lamivudine remain the agents of choice to prevent HBV reactivation in high risk patients. In conclusion, the immunosuppressive effect of NHL and its therapy provide a pathway for HBV reactivation, especially in patients treated with anti-CD20 antibody. Since many HBV positive patients are often excluded from clinical trials of novel agents in NHL, more aggressive post-market surveillance of new agents, well-designed best practice advisories, and timely case reports are needed to reduce the incidence of HBV reactivation. Lastly, large prospective investigations coupled with well-utilized best practice advisories need to be conducted to understand the impact of more potent novel NHL therapy on HBV reactivation.

Screening rate for hepatitis B virus infection in patients undergoing chemotherapy in Japan

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate the screening rate for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, which is recommended by some guidelines for the prevention of HBV reactivation, in patients undergoing chemotherapy for malignancy in Japan.

METHODS

The study subjects were 3302 patients who had received first-line chemotherapy for malignancy from Apr 2008 through Mar 2013 utilizing the Claims Database of the Japan Medical Data Center. The proportion of patients who had been tested for HBsAg (P-HBsAg) and the proportion of HBsAg-negative patients who had undergone tests for anti-HBc and anti-HBs (P-HBc/HBsAb) before chemotherapy were investigated.

RESULTS

P-HBsAg and P-HBc/HBsAb in all 3302 patients were 66.3 and 19.9 %, respectively. P-HBsAg in patients with solid tumors and those with hematological malignancies were 66.1 and 67.5 % (p = 0.61), respectively, and P-HBc/HBsAb were 12.3 and 75.8 % (p < 0.0001), respectively. P-HBsAg in patients from cancer centers and non-cancer centers were 66.9 and 65.5 % (p = 0.43), respectively, and P-HBc/HBsAb were 25.1 and 12.4 % (p < 0.0001), respectively. P-HBsAg in patients encountered before and after the announcement of the Japanese guideline were 51.3 and 67.1 % (p < 0.001), respectively, and P-HBc/HBsAb were 7.9 and 20.4 % (p = 0.01), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The screening rate for HBV among cancer patients scheduled for chemotherapy remains unsatisfactory, especially in patients with solid tumors and those from non-cancer centers. Although the figures are improving after the announcement of the Japanese guideline, intensive measures to improve awareness about HBV reactivation during/after chemotherapy are needed.

Management of hepatitis B reactivation in immunosuppressed patients: An update on current recommendations

The proportion of hepatitis B virus (HBV) previously exposed patients who receive immunosuppressive treatment is usually very small. However, if these individuals are exposed to potent immunosuppressive compounds, the risk of HBV reactivation (HBVr) increases with the presence of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) in the serum. Chronic HBsAg carriers have a higher risk than those who have a total IgG anticore as the only marker of resolved/occult HBV disease. The loss of immune control in these patients may results in the reactivation of HBV replication within hepatocytes. Upon reconstitution of the immune system, infected hepatocytes are once again targeted and damaged by immune surveillance in an effort to clear the virus. There are different virological scenarios, and a wide spectrum of associated drugs with specific and stratified risk for the development of HBVr. Some of this agents can trigger a severe degree of hepatocellular damage, including hepatitis, acute liver failure, and even death despite employment of effective antiviral therapies. Currently, HBVr incidence seems to be increasing around the world; a fact mainly related to the incessant appearance of more powerful immunosuppressive drugs launched to the market. Moreover, there is no consensus on the length of prophylactic treatment before the patients are treated with immunosuppressive therapy, and for how long this therapy should be extended once treatment is completed. Therefore, this review article will focus on when to treat, when to monitor, what patients should receive HBV therapy, and what drugs should be selected for each scenario. Lastly, we will update the definition, risk factors, screening, and treatment recommendations based on both current and different HBV management guidelines.

Outcomes of the implementation of the computer-assisted HBView system for the prevention of hepatitis B virus reactivation in chemotherapy patients: a retrospective analysis

Background

Screening for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is recommended worldwide for patients receiving systemic chemotherapy in accordance with clinical guidelines, but compliance varies by country and facility. Alert systems may be useful for promoting screening, but it is unclear how effective such systems are. In this study, we investigated HBV screening procedures and their incorporation into treatment regimens following the implementation of an alert system.

Methods

An alert system was introduced at our hospital in April 2012. The rates of HBV screening in the periods before and after the introduction of the alert system (September 2010 to March 2012 and April 2012 to October 2013, respectively) were investigated. We collected data on hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), hepatitis B surface antibody (HBsAb), hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb), and HBV-DNA testing in patients. As a result of this analysis, we developed a system in which pharmacists would intervene to check and confirm whether HBV screening had occurred in patients scheduled to begin treatment with chemotherapy. We named our project the “HBView” project, and the rate of HBV screening and the number of times pharmacists intervened was studied during specific time periods before and after the HBView project commenced (July 2013 to December 2013 and January 2014 to June 2014, respectively).

Results

After introducing the alert system, the percentage of patients tested for HBsAb/HBcAb and HBV-DNA increased significantly, from 71.6 % to 84.9 % and from 44.5 % to 69.7 %, respectively. However, the rate of compliance with HBV testing guidelines was not 100 % after interventions. The numbers of patients who were not screened but should have been before and after the introduction of HBView were 6 and 17, respectively. Two patients at risk of HBV reactivation were identified after intervention by pharmacists; their intervention thus prevented HBV reactivation.

Conclusions

Compliance with clinical HBV screening guidelines was not sufficiently improved after the introduction of the automatic alert system; however, the HBView project proved useful in reinforcing the automatic alert system.

Fatal hepatitis B reactivation in a patient with islet cell tumor on octreotide and sirolimus

Reactivation of hepatitis B viral infection (HBVr) is a known risk in cancer patients with a history of chronic hepatitis B infection receiving cytotoxic or immunosuppressive therapies. Patients with hematologic malignancies or those who have received stem cell transplantation seem to be most at risk but reactivation has been reported with various malignancies. Reactivation can present as asymptomatic liver function test abnormalities (LFTs), with symptoms of abdominal pain, encephalopathy, or as fulminant hepatitis and liver failure. Here we report the first case of a patient with islet cell tumor on octreotide and sirolimus who developed hepatitis B reactivation with fulminant liver failure and death.

Invited Commentary: Screening for hepatitis B in the immigrant population and individuals who are in need of immunosuppressive drug therapy

Chronic hepatitis B (CHB) afflicts approximately 300 million people in the world. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) is a known carcinogenic virus and continues to be the leading cause of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (1). Approximately 70% of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) carriers reside in intermediate (>2% prevalence) to high-risk (>8% prevalence) areas such as Asia, the Pacific Islands, Africa, India, and parts of Southern Europe (1). There is a common misperception that this disorder is not very common in the United States. However, 63% of the nearly 28 million immigrants who entered the US between 1974 and 2008 were born in countries of intermediate or high prevalence (2). The Immigrant Refugee and Migrant Health Branch of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that an average of 53,000 CHB cases were imported to the US yearly from 2004 to 2008. Forty percent of these cases originated from China, Vietnam, and the Philippines (2). The CDC has recently revised its prevalence estimates and concluded that 2.2 million US residents are likely to have chronic HBV infection, of which 1.3 million are judged to be foreign-born individuals. Even these figures are likely to be too low, however, because the estimates do not take into account illegal immigrants and other socially disadvantaged patients. Importantly, HBsAg testing is not required as part of the process of immigrating into the United States (3). This lack of a requirement for HBV screening is an important missed opportunity to programmatically diagnose this condition.

Screening for viral hepatitis prior to rituximab chemotherapy

In 2008, the CDC published guidelines recommending screening of all persons undergoing treatment with rituximab to identify persons at risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation. We evaluated implementation of this recommendation in veterans, who are at increased risk of HBV, and determined characteristics of those screened. We also evaluated a control setting, rates of hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening among the same rituximab-treated patients. There are no guidelines that recommend HCV screening prior to initiation of rituximab. Medical records of patients receiving rituximab between January 2006 and December 2012 were reviewed according to two time periods: 2006-2008 (period 1, pre-guidelines) and 2009-2012 (period 2, post-guidelines). Patient demographics, concomitant chemotherapy regimen (protocol, dose, duration), treatment indication, risk factors for hepatitis infection (substance abuse, homelessness, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)), and HBV/HCV screening status were documented. During the study period, 102 patients were treated with rituximab (49 in period 1 and 53 in period 2). During periods 1 and 2, 22 and 32 % of rituximab-treated patients were screened for HBV, respectively (p = 0.375). Treatment during 2009 was the only significant predictor of HBV screening in the adjusted model (p = 0.01). For HCV during periods 1 and 2, 22 and 21 % of patients were screened, respectively (p = 1.00). There were no significant predictors of HCV screening. Rates of screening for HBV among rituximab-treated patients were low, both before and after dissemination of guidelines recommending universal HBV screening of rituximab-treated patients.

Prevention of acute exacerbation of chronic hepatitis B infection in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy in a hepatitis B virus endemic area

Reactivation of hepatitis B viral (HBV) infection in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy may cause interruption of chemotherapy and lead to liver failure and death. In our institute, a computerized order entry-based alert system was introduced in September 2011 to remind healthcare providers of HBV testing when prescribing chemotherapy. Since August 2012, an order entry-based therapeutic control system has been applied to ensure HBV prophylaxis during chemotherapy. This retrospective cohort study included cancer patients receiving chemotherapy in the Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital from November 2009 to June 2013. The prechemotherapy HBV screening rate, HBV prophylactic rate, and severe HBV acute exacerbation rate were compared between stages with different order systems. Newly diagnosed cancer patients (n = 2512) were included. The HBV testing rate in the screening reminder stage was higher than that in the educational stage (93.5% versus 40.2%, P < 0.001), whereas the adequate HBV prophylactic rates in the two order entry-based stages were comparable (41.1% versus 39.2%). Patients in the order entry-based therapeutic control stage had a higher HBV screening rate (99.3% versus 40.2%, P < 0.001) and a higher HBV prophylactic rate (95.8% versus 39.2%, P < 0.001) than those in the educational stage. Additionally, the severe HBV acute exacerbation rate in the therapeutic control stage was lower than those in the educational and screening reminder stages (0% versus 1.2% and 1.2%, respectively; both P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

A computerized order entry-based therapeutic control system can provide excellent prechemotherapy HBV screening for cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy and can effectively prevent severe acute exacerbation of HBV infection in hospitals among HBV endemic areas.